Re: [PATCH] gcc-configure-common.inc: duplicate armv7a over-ride for armv8a

[Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1265 bytes --]


> On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:32 AM, Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2016-03-24 at 10:37 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote:
>> 
>> Renaming armv8a -> aarch32 is going to affect almost every line in
>> the patch. We should probably drop the current patch from master-
>> next.
> 
> "AArch32" applies retrospectively to all older versions of the ARM
> architecture as well,

not really. Arm refers to aarch32 specifically when we use 32-bit on ARMv8
so atleast we are speaking same terms.

> so it's not obvious to me that a straight rename
> of the existing "armv8a" override to "aarch32" would be the right thing
> either.
> 
> I think the whole approach to ARMv8 and AArch64 in OE needs to be
> carefully thought through before we start landing any patches for that
> stuff.  We have a tangled enough maze of overrides right now and I
> think we should make all efforts to avoid it getting worse.

Totally agreed.
The current tunes we have are probably sufficient for 64bit case and it simple
and nice. However, the fact of people running 32bit userspace on a53 SOCs
is a reality due to porting reasons or resource reasons. So I think divorcing
legacy tunes and just having aarch64 and another one for aarch32 is going to suffice

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]